[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3875-3876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1336]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-361]


Certain Portable On-Car Disc Brake Lathes and Components Thereof; 
Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Issued 
on Remand; Determination of No Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined not to review the initial determination (ID) 
issued on November 28, 1994, by the presiding administrative law judge 
(ALJ) after remand by the Commission in the above-captioned 
investigation, thereby finding that there is no violation of section 
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shara L. Aranoff, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202-
205-3090. Copies of the non-confidential version of the ID and all 
other nonconfidential documents filed in connection with this 
investigation are or will be available for inspection during official 
business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, 
U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street S.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20436, telephone 202-205-2000. Hearing-impaired persons are 
advised that information on the matter can be obtained by contacting 
the 

[[Page 3876]]
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 24, 1993, the Commission 
instituted an investigation of a complaint filed by Pro-Cut 
International, Inc. (``Pro-Cut'') under section 337 of the Tariff Act 
of 1930 (19 U.S.C. Sec. 1337). The complaint alleged that two 
respondents imported, sold for importation, or sold in the United 
States after importation certain portable on-car disc brake lathes and 
components thereof that infringed the sole claim of U.S. Letters Patent 
4,226,146 (``the '146 patent''). The Commission's notice of 
investigation named as respondents Hunter Engineering Company 
(``Hunter'') and Ludwig Hunger Maschinenfabrik GmbH (``Hunger''), each 
of which was alleged to have committed one or more unfair acts in the 
importation or sale of portable on-car disc brake lathes that infringe 
the asserted patent claim.
    The ALJ conducted an evidentiary hearing on May 2-4, 1994, and 
issued his final ID on August 12, 1994. He found that: (1) respondents' 
imported product does not infringe the asserted patent claim; (2) 
complainant satisfied the economic requirements for existence of a 
domestic industry; but that (3) there is no domestic industry because 
complainant is not practicing the '146 patent. Based upon his findings 
of no infringement and no domestic industry, the ALJ concluded that 
there was no violation of section 337.
    On September 29, 1994, the Commission determined to review the 
August 12 final ID and to remand the ID in part to the ALJ for further 
explanation of his findings of no infringement under the doctrine of 
equivalents and no domestic industry. The Commission ordered the ALJ to 
issue an ID on the remanded issues on or before November 28, 1994. The 
Commission adopted the August 12 final ID in all other respects.
    On November 28, 1994, the ALJ issued an ID addressing the remanded 
issues. The remand ID provides additional findings of fact and analysis 
and reiterates the ALJ's prior findings of no infringement under the 
doctrine of equivalents and no domestic industry. Complainant filed a 
petition for review objecting to both findings of the remand ID. Both 
respondents and the Commission investigative attorneys filed 
oppositions to the petition for review supporting the ALJ's findings in 
the remand ID. No agency comments were received.
    Having considered the record in this investigation, including the 
August 12 final ID, the November 28 remand ID, and all submissions 
filed in connection with the petitions for review of both IDs, the 
Commission determined not to review the November 28 remand ID.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 USC 1337, and sections 210.53 of the 
Commission's Interim Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.53.

    Issued: January 10, 1995.

    By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-1336 Filed 1-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P